DOCSLIB.ORG

AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY of ANTONY and CLEOPATRA, 1960-1977 by JULIE J. CHEN Bachelor of Arts National Taiwan University Taipe

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY of ANTONY and CLEOPATRA, 1960-1977 by JULIE J. CHEN Bachelor of Arts National Taiwan University Taipe ,AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA, 1960-1977 By JULIE J. CHEN /! Bachelor of Arts National Taiwan University Taipei, Taiwan, China 1976 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARI'S May, 1980 AN ANNOTATED BIBLICX;RAPHY OF ANI'ONY AND CLEOPATRA, 1960-1977 Thesis Approved: L 105'1795 ii PREFACE Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra is one of the most magnificent plays ever written and has inspired a vast amount of critical response. The purpose of this study is to provide an annotated bibliography of the play from 1960 to 1977. An introductory essay is included to clarify the various approaches used in understanding the play and the trend of the play's recent criticism. I have included in the bibliography interpretations, evaluations, and source studies; commentaries on Dryden's All for Love which give con­ siderable attention to Antony and Cleopatra are also listed. Such items as editions, translations, reviews, and theatrical productions are omitted, and discussions of Antony and Cleop~tra in books treating other subjects are not exhaustively covered. Foreign language works are not listed except those that appear in Shakespeare Jahrbuch and those that have English versions. The bibliographical entries are numbered consecutively throughout and arranged alphabetically in each year by author •. The annotations which follow each individual entry attempt to present its major thesis as suc­ cinctly and objectively as possible. Sources consulted in compiling this bibliography include the Annual Shakespeare Quarterly Bibliography, the Annual MLA International Bibli­ ography, Stanley Wells's Shakespeare: Select Bibliographical Guides (1973),. and David Bevington's Shakespeare (1978). I wish to express my appreciation to Dr. David S. Berkeley, my major adviser, who introduced Antony and Cleopatra to me and guided my efforts iii throughout this study. I am also very grateful to Dr. Jane-Marie Luecke and Dr. William R. Wray for their helpful comments. My special thanks are due to Dr. and Mrs. Milburn for their sustaining encouragement. iv TABLE OF CONI'ENI'S Page INI'RODUCTION: THE TREND OF ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA CRITICISM, 1960-1977 . 1 BIBLIOGRAPHY • • e e e e e e e e I I . 8 v INI'RODUCTION: THE TREND OF ANI'ONY AND CLEOPATRA CRITICISM, 1960-1977 Antony and Cleopatra,· neglected by most of the pre-twentieth-century critics for its immorality and ill-planned design, has been constantly under critical scrutiny in the present century, This reevaluation may owe something to the eloquent and 00.lanced criticisms of A, C• Bradley and M, W, Maccallum, It is Bradley (Oxford Lectures~ Poetry [1909]) who first points out the differences of Antony from the four major trag- . edies, and MacCallum (Shakespeare's Roman Plays and Their Background [1910]) compares, in more detail than other critics, the lovers with their counterparts in Plutarch, Since the 1930' s, as poetry has become more and more emphasized by critics of Shakespearean plays, Antony has risen in estimation. G. W. Knight (The lm.perial Theme [1931]) examines the play's image patterns and themes and concludes that the play celebrates "tri­ umphant love" as the lovers die into spiritual life, But the study of · the language and imagery also leads to a closer appreciation of ambigu­ ities within the play, Both J, F. Danby (Poets~ Fortune's Hill [1952]) and 1. C. Knights (Some Shakespearean Themes [1959]) sense decadence in the lovers' passion and the irreconcilability between the Roman and the Egyptian values; B, T, Spencer ("Antony and Cleopatra and the Paradoxical Metaphor" [1958]) endorses their assertion by studying the verbal paradoxes in the play, As for the historically minded critics like J, E, Phillips (The State in Shakespeare's Greek and Roman Plays [1940]), Daniel Stempel ("The Transmigration of the Crocodile" [1956]), and Franklin Dickey (Not 1 2 Wisely But Too Well [1957]), they analyze the play in the light of the Elizabethan conception of morality and the long-standing tradition of abuse of the love-theme, and they tend to emphasize the lustful nature of the love and Antony's failings as a commander, Behind all these con­ troversies it is clear that for decades critics of Antony have aimed to assess the relationship of the protagonists and to arbitrate between the claims of Egypt and Rome. The same effort of assessment and arbitration is still made in the 1960's and ?O's with historical, poetical, or theat­ rical emphasis. But various as their approaches are, most of the recent critics of Antony agree that no judgment is absolute in the play. Recent histo.rical critics of Antony are mostly devoted to. tempering two notions made by their predecessors: the condemnatory attitude toward the love affair supposedly representing the Renaissance consensus and the supposedly uniform abusive attitude toward Antony and Cleopatra that dates back to medieval times. Julian C. Rice in "Renaissance Perspectives on Antony and Cleopatra: A Study of Themes, Sources, and Elizabethan Skep­ ticism" ( 1968) .!:}ontends that a sympathetic attitude toward "sensual faults" does exist in Renaissance literature and that Antony is Shakespeare's mature dramatic statement of the Renaissance skepticism. Marilyn C. Williamson {"Antony and Cleopatra. in the Late Middle Ages and Early Ren­ aissance" [1972]) discovers an astonishing diversity of treatment of the Antony and Cleopatra story, not orily among writers, but also within the works of a single author. · Her discovery explains that the medieval exemplum does not bring uniformity of interpretation as Franklin Dickey claims. Donna B • Hamil ton in "Antony and Cleopatra and the Trad.ition of Noble Lovers" (1973) studies the famous lovers of antiquity as they are alluded to in Antony and suggests that Shakespeare had employed this 3 tradition of noble lovers to imply the value of Antony and Cleopatra's love. The thing common among these critics is their attempt to lessen the moral emphasis and add another dimension to the play. Although the poetic approach to Antony has been much attacked lately, it is still one of the most popular critical methods in the 1960's and contributes a lot to the understanding of the play. Inheriting John Danby and L. C. Knights' study of poetic texture, D. A. Traversi (Shakespeare: The Roman Plays [1963]) analyze·s the speech of the play in detailed fashion, especially that of the first scene where the lyrical exchanges of the lovers vie with Philo's condemnation of them for our approval. While this kind of conflicting commentary continues throughout the play, Traversi comments that "To bear both judgments in mind, refusing to neglect one in order to exalt the other, is to respond truly to the intention of the play" (p.82). As for the lovers, Traversi believes that they finally achieve a kind of nobility that is ultimately between the derogatory Roman estimate of them and their own exalted self-appraisal. In Shakespeare's Problem Plays (1963) Ernest Schanzer iterates the view that a balanced judgment of the lovers ought to be maintained. Schanzer classifies Antony as'a problem play because of the audience's uncertain responses to the play's central moral problem, A. P. Riemer in!:., Reading of Shakespeare's "Antony and Cleopatra" (1968) emphasizes the "dialectic manner" of the play's speech. Philo's opening speech, for example, by its very vehemence, is more an expression of a particular point of view than an exposition. "Lack of fixity," Riemer asserts, is the play's central vision, In Shakespeare's Roman Plays: The Function of Imagery in Drama (1961) Maurice Charney combines.theatrical and imagistic interpretations by con­ sidering gestures on stage as non-verbal imagery. His analysis of the 4 play's "world" theme, especially the image patterns that describe the contrasting values and qualities of Egypt and Rome, leads him to believe that the play delicately balances opposing ways of life. Charney concludes that "it is necessary • • • to ·hold both the Egyptian and Roman themes in the play together in the mind as a tragic unity. Either without the other makes for distortion and incompleteness" (p .114). In "The Serpent, the Sun and 'Nilus Slime': A Focal Point for the Ambiguity of Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra" (1968) Charles R. Lyons finds that the apocalyptic imagery which characterizes the death of the lovers is paralleled by the demonic imagery which has also been used to project the quality of their love. Also in a series of images relating to the annual flooding of the Nile is the basic ambiguity of the play. "Ambiguity," "paradox," and. "irony" are some key words in recent Antony criticism. Instead of being applied to the language only, they are found important in shaping the play's character, structure, and themes. Benjamin Spencer finds paradox "the matrix from which much of the charac­ terization and the action sprung" (p.373). Janet Adelman (The Common Liar [1973]) further explains how paradox and hyperbole are to some extent em­ bodied in the lovers as "Cleopatra is paradoxical in nature and Antony is hyperbolical in all that he does" (p.115). As hyperbole is appropriate to the play's theme of excess, Adelman claims, so does paradox describe the play's cent·ral strategy: "we achieve faith by deliberately invoking doubt" (p .111) • Stephen A. Shapiro in "The Varying Shore of the World Ambivalence in Antony and Cleopatra" (1966) emphasizes that ambivalence is the central theme of Antony as it operates through plot, characters, and imagery to condition the mood of the play, William Blissett examines the multitudinous interrelated uses of dramatic irony in "Dramatic Irony .5 in Antony and Cleopatra" (1967).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • John Dryden and the Late 17Th Century Dramatic Experience Lecture 16 (C) by Asher Ashkar Gohar 1 Credit Hr
    JOHN DRYDEN AND THE LATE 17TH CENTURY DRAMATIC EXPERIENCE LECTURE 16 (C) BY ASHER ASHKAR GOHAR 1 CREDIT HR. JOHN DRYDEN (1631 – 1700) HIS LIFE: John Dryden was an English poet, literary critic, translator, and playwright who was made England's first Poet Laureate in 1668. He is seen as dominating the literary life of Restoration England to such a point that the period came to be known in literary circles as the “Age of Dryden”. The son of a country gentleman, Dryden grew up in the country. When he was 11 years old the Civil War broke out. Both his father’s and mother’s families sided with Parliament against the king, but Dryden’s own sympathies in his youth are unknown. About 1644 Dryden was admitted to Westminster School, where he received a predominantly classical education under the celebrated Richard Busby. His easy and lifelong familiarity with classical literature begun at Westminster later resulted in idiomatic English translations. In 1650 he entered Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took his B.A. degree in 1654. What Dryden did between leaving the university in 1654 and the Restoration of Charles II in 1660 is not known with certainty. In 1659 his contribution to a memorial volume for Oliver Cromwell marked him as a poet worth watching. His “heroic stanzas” were mature, considered, sonorous, and sprinkled with those classical and scientific allusions that characterized his later verse. This kind of public poetry was always one of the things Dryden did best. On December 1, 1663, he married Elizabeth Howard, the youngest daughter of Thomas Howard, 1st earl of Berkshire.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Eras, Two Men, One Value: Fides in Modern Performances of Shakespeare’S
    Three Eras, Two Men, One Value: Fides in Modern Performances of Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra Depictions of Marc Antony and Caesar Augustus have changed dramatically between the first and twenty-first centuries, partially because of William Shakespeare’s seventeenth-century play Antony and Cleopatra. In 2006 and 2010, England’s Royal Shakespeare Company staged vastly different interpretations of this classically influenced Shakespearean text. How do the modern performances rework ancient views of Antony and Augustus, particularly in light of the ancient Roman value fides (loyalty or good faith)? This paper answers that question by examining the intersections between Greco-Roman literary-historic narratives – as received in Shakespeare’s early modern play – and the two modern performances. The contemporary versions of Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra create contrasting constructions of Antony and Augustus by modernizing the characters and/or their worlds. The 2006 rendition (directed by Gregory Doran) presents an explosive but weak-willed Antony (Sir Patrick Stewart) and a prudish yet petulant Augustus (John Hopkins). On the other hand, the 2010 adaptation (directed by Michael Boyd) shows a hotheaded and frank Antony (Darrell D’Silva) who struggles against a cold and manipulative Augustus (John Mackay). Both performances reveal the complexity of these ancient figures as the men engage with and evaluate claims upon their familial, societal, and personal fides. Representations of Antony and Augustus necessarily involve fides, though classical accounts do not always feature this term. As military and political leaders, both men led lives filled with decisions about loyalty, specifically what deserved it and in what degree. The modern dramatizations further underscore fides in their portrayals of Antony and Augustus.
    [Show full text]
  • 132158469.Pdf
    THE PALE BHAKEBPEARE Revised Edition - - General Editors Helge Kiikeritz and Charles T. Prouty THE YALE SIIAKESPEABE THE TRAGEDY OF ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA Edited by Peter G. Phia.1a.s NEW IIAVEN AND LONDON YALE UNIVERSITY I'RESS Oopyright, 1922, 1966, by Yala Univereity Prear. first Publiahed, July 1921 Revised Edition, July 1956 Pif th Printing, June 1965 Prhtted {n the United States of A~norica , A11 rights reserved. This book nany not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (except by reviewer.9 for the public press), witliout written pemnissiolb from tlie publivlrers. Library of Congress ontalog card number: 55-102GC Originally published on the fund given to tho Yale University Pross in 1917 by the me.mbers of the Kingslsy l'rust Asaocintion (Scroll and Xey Society of Pale College) to commeazorate the seve,nty-jif th anniversary of the founding of the society. Preface of the General Editors S the late Professor Tucker Brooke has observed, A practically all modern editions of Shakespeare are 18th-century versions of the plays, bnscd on the additions, alterations, and emendations of editors of that period. It has been our purpose, as it was Pro- fessor Brooke's, to give the modern reader Shake- speare's plays in the approximate form of their orig- inal appearance. About half the plays appeared in quarto form before the publication of the First Folio in 1623. Thus for a large number of plays the only available text is that of the Folio. In the case of quayto plays our policy has been to use that text as tlie basis of the edition, unless it is clear that the test has been contaminated.
    [Show full text]
  • Study Guide 2016-2017
    Study Guide 2016-2017 by William Shakespeare Standards Theatre English Language Arts Social Studies TH.68.C.2.4: Defend personal responses. LAFS.68.RH.1.2: Determine central ideas. SS.912.H.1.5: Examine social issues. TH.68.C.3.1: Discuss design elements. LAFS.910.L.3.4: Determine unknown words. TH.68.H.1.5: Describe personal responses. LAFS.910.L.3.5: Demonstrate figurative language. TH.912.S.1.8: Use research to extract clues. LAFS.1112.SL.1.1: Initiate collaborative discussions. TH.912.S.2.9: Research artistic choices. TH.912.H.1.4: Interpret through historical lenses. Content Advisory: Antony and Cleopatra is a political drama fueled by intimate relationships. There are battle scenes. If it were a movie, Antony and Cleopatra would be rated “PG-13.” !1 Antony and Cleopatra Table of Contents Introduction p. 3 Enjoying Live Theater p. 3 About the Play p. 6 Plot Summary p. 6 Meet the Characters p. 7 Meet the Playwright p. 8 Historical Context p. 11 Elizabethan Theater p. 11 Activities p. 12 Themes and Discussion p. 17 Bibliography p. 17 !2 Antony and Cleopatra An Introduction Educators: Thank you for taking the time out of your very busy schedule to bring the joy of theatre arts to your classroom. We at Orlando Shakes are well aware of the demands on your time and it is our goal to offer you supplemental information to compliment your curriculum with ease and expediency. What’s New? Lots! First, let me take a moment to introduce our new Children’s Series Coordinator, Brandon Yagel.
    [Show full text]
  • The Not-So-Holy Shrine of Catholicism in Romeo and Juliet
    Te Not-So-Holy Shrine of Catholicism in Romeo and Juliet Margaret Rothrock “Te Not-So-Holy Shrine of Catholicism in Romeo and Juliet” questions a view of Shakespeare’s relationship to the Reformation in the early tragedy, which claims that his main Reformed concern in the play is to endorse individualistic notions of desire and repentance. Instead, the play is shown to display Reformational sensibilities in its exposure of blasphemous imagery and societal corruption as the vehicle for the lovers’ downfall. Tis reading takes a critical eye to a culturally idealized romance, allowing modern readers to consider more carefully how passion and temptation were viewed in a post- Reformational context. See and view the whole Chapter with diligence, for it is worthy David Balty is one of the few scholars who tries to to be well considered, specially that is written of the deceauing fll this gap. In his dissertation, Te Teological Bard: of the simple and vnwise common people by Idols and Images, Shakespeare and the Evolving English Reformation, he and repeated twise or thrise lest it should be forgotten. And in the argues that a Protestant emphasis on individualism is the Chapter following be these words: Te painting of the picture and driving force behind the play: the lovers are victims of a carued Image with diuers colours, entiseth the ignorant so, that societally-focused, Catholic schema which de-emphasizes he honoureth and loueth the picture of a dead image that hath no individual repentance and instead endorses social obliga- soule (Apocrypha. Wisdom 15.4-5). Neuerthelesse, they that loue tion.
    [Show full text]
  • Desperate Housewives of Shakespeare
    Desperate Housewives of Shakespeare A One-Act Comedy By Jane and Jim Jeffries Performance Rights It is an infringement of the federal copyright law to copy or reproduce this script in any manner or to perform this play without royalty payment. All rights are controlled by Eldridge Publishing Co., Inc. Contact the publisher for additional scripts and further licensing information. The author’s name must appear on all programs and advertising with the notice: “Produced by special arrangement with Eldridge Publishing Company.” ELDRIDGE PUBLISHING COMPANY hiStage.com © 2013 by Jane and Jim Jeffries Download your complete script from Eldridge Publishing http://www.histage.com/playdetails.asp?PID=2502 Desperate Housewives of Shakespeare - 2 - Dedication Special thanks to Susan Dahl and the Hudson Drama Department for showcasing this play at the Wisconsin One-Act Play Competition in October 2012. STORY OF THE PLAY Okay, these housewives may not be real, but they are desperate! Shakespeare has been manipulating and twisting their lives for six plays now, and they desperately want to escape his evil machinations. But are they desperate enough to commit murder? Shakespeare has been found dead: stabbed, poisoned, starved, choked, bitten by an asp, and even turned into a baardvark (excuse the pun). Lady Macbeth, Juliet, Kate, Rosalind, Cleopatra, and Titania all had the means and the motive to kill Shakespeare, but who really did it? This comic tragedy (or is that tragic comedy?) has all of the action of a Shakespearean play but with none of those angsty monologues about the meaning of life. Great for a strong female cast with some serious comedy chops.
    [Show full text]
  • Shame and Betrayal in Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra
    Kawasaki Journal of Medical Welfare Vol. 26, No. 1, 2020 41-48 Original Paper Shame and Betrayal in Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra Michael KREMENIK＊1 (Accepted July 17, 2020) Key words: betrayal, suicide, negotiation, shame Abstract The aim of this paper is to look at how William Shakespeare took the historical information available to him in the story of Mark Antony, Triumvir of Rome, and Cleopatra, Queen of Egypt, and turned it into his tragic play Antony and Cleopatra. Four parts of the play are analyzed: The Battle of Actium, negotiations with Caesar Octavian, the Alexandrian War and Cleopatra’s Suicide. Did Antony know beforehand that Cleopatra and her navy would abandon the Battle of Actium and return to Egypt? In the aftermath of Actium both Cleopatra and Antony negotiated separately with Octavian. What is known about Cleopatra’s willingness to give up on Antony and defect to Octavian’s side? Was Antony really so surprised to see Cleopatra’s navy defect to Octavian? Or was he blindsided and right to feel betrayed by Cleopatra? And why did Cleopatra have a messenger inform Antony that she was dead? Was she afraid of Antony after her navy’s defection? Was she looking for sympathy? Trying to curtail his anger? Or was she hoping that Antony would kill himself and thus give her free reign to negotiate with Octavian as Queen of Egypt and not as Antony’s mistress? All of these questions will be looked at from the point of view of Shakespeare’s tragedy and how he manipulated the historical sources to write his own version of this world famous tragic love story.
    [Show full text]
  • Language Fixation in Dryden's All for Love
    Language Fixation in Dryden's All for Love MARCUS NORDLUND In his preface to All for Love (1677), John Dryden made the following remark on the relationship between his new play and its Shakespearean source: "In my Stile I have profess'd to imitate the Divine Shakespeare.... I hope I need not explain my self, that I have not Copy'd my Author servilely: Words and Phrases must of necessity receive a change in succeeding Ages: but 'tis almost a Miracle that much of his Language remains so pure..." (18). What is particularly interesting about this passage is how a standard invocation of the Renaissance ideal of imitatio— that is, a balance between respectful imitation and individual innovation— immediately turns into a divided remark on language change. While Dryden seems to accept that language change is inevitable, his characterisation of Shakespeare's language as remarkably 'pure' also suggests that mutability is ultimately synonymous with corruption. This negative perception of linguistic change and the resulting desire for purity and stability is entirely in keeping with Dryden's well-known commitment to language reform: the idea that it might be possible to "fix" the English tongue and thus render it more stable and dependable.1 The question I want to raise here is whether the slippage from dramatic imitation to language change in the passage above is an isolated event, or whether similar concerns also rubbed off on the very play to which he affixed this preface. Perhaps All for Love itself contains traces of this self- conscious attitude to language, and particularly the dream of a more stable correspondence between words and things? Before I define my argument more closely I want to examine and integrate two important critical insights about All for Love, the first of which concerns its overriding theme.
    [Show full text]
  • “Much Virtue in If”: Ethics and Uncertainty in Hamlet and As You Like It David Summers Capital University, [email protected]
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Selected Papers of the Ohio Valley Shakespeare Literary Magazines Conference November 2014 “Much Virtue in If”: Ethics and Uncertainty in Hamlet and As You Like It David Summers Capital University, [email protected] Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/spovsc Part of the Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons, Literature in English, British Isles Commons, and the Theatre and Performance Studies Commons Recommended Citation Summers, David (2011) "“Much Virtue in If”: Ethics and Uncertainty in Hamlet and As You Like It," Selected Papers of the Ohio Valley Shakespeare Conference: Vol. 4 , Article 4. Available at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/spovsc/vol4/iss2011/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Literary Magazines at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Selected Papers of the Ohio Valley Shakespeare Conference by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. “Much Virtue in If”: Ethics and Uncertainty in Hamlet and As You Like It David Summers, Capital University n recent years we have seen a renewed interest in Shakespeare as an intellect, a mind at work on problems we I could properly consider “philosophical.” Not only have we seen literary critics writing about philosophy—David Bevington’s Shakespeare’s Ideas, Jonathan Bates’s The Soul of the Age and A.D.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of the Two Principal Characters of Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra with Their Prototypes in Plutarch's Life of Marcus Antonius Robert G
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations 1949 A Comparison of the Two Principal Characters of Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra with Their Prototypes in Plutarch's Life of Marcus Antonius Robert G. Lynch Loyola University Chicago Recommended Citation Lynch, Robert G., "A Comparison of the Two Principal Characters of Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra with Their rP ototypes in Plutarch's Life of Marcus Antonius" (1949). Master's Theses. Paper 772. http://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/772 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1949 Robert G. Lynch A CON;PARISON OF THE T"<'IO PRIiWIPAL CHARACTERS OF SHAKESP:2:J.RE' S ANTONY -AND CLEOPATRA laTH THEla PROTOTYl?ES IN PLUTARCH t S ~ OF r4ARCUS ANTONIUS BY ROBERT G. LYNCH, S.J. A 'fHESIS SUBI\~ITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIRl:l:;j\IENTS FOIt THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN LOYOLA UNIVERSITY 1949 ~ ------------------------------------------------------------~ TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. Illll'RODUCTION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •• 1 The subject---state of question--­ comparison of Shakespee.re and Plutarch ---Shakespeare's method of prime in­ terest---why characterization instead of plot or diction---why this play--­ an objection answered---the procedure. II. CLEOPAffRA, COURTESAN OR QUEEN? •••••••••••••••••• 13 Reason for treating Cleopatra first--­ importance of Cleopatra for the trag­ edy---Shakespeare's aims: specific and general---political motives in Plutarch's Queen---real love in Shakes­ peare's---Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Front Matter
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-02152-5 - The Tempest: Updated edition Edited by David Lindley Frontmatter More information THE NEW CAMBRIDGE SHAKESPEARE general editor Brian Gibbons associate general editor A. R. Braunmuller, University of California, Los Angeles From the publication of the first volumes in 1984 the General Editor of the New Cambridge Shakespeare was Philip Brockbank and the Associate General Editors were Brian Gibbons and Robin Hood. From 1990 to 1994 the General Editor was Brian Gibbons and the Associate General Editors were A. R. Braunmuller and Robin Hood. THE TEMPEST The Tempest is one of the most suggestive, yet most elusive of all Shakespeare’s plays, and has provoked a wide range of critical interpretations. It is a magical romance, yet deeply and problematically embedded in seventeenth-century debates about authority and power. In this updated edition, David Lindley has thoroughly revised the introduction and reading list to take account of the latest directions in criticism and performance. Including a new section on casting in recent productions, Lindley’s introduction explores the complex questions this raises about colonisation, racial and gender stereotypes, and the nature of the theatrical experience. Careful attention is also given to the play’s dramatic form, stagecraft, and use of music and spectacle, to demonstrate its uniquely experimental nature. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-02152-5 - The Tempest: Updated edition Edited
    [Show full text]
  • THE DISPLACED NEW WORLD of ANTONY and CLEOPATRA Christopher Kane John Carroll University, [email protected]
    John Carroll University Carroll Collected Masters Essays Theses, Essays, and Senior Honors Projects Summer 2016 SHADOWS OF EMPIRE: THE DISPLACED NEW WORLD OF ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA Christopher Kane John Carroll University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://collected.jcu.edu/mastersessays Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Kane, Christopher, "SHADOWS OF EMPIRE: THE DISPLACED NEW WORLD OF ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA" (2016). Masters Essays. 54. http://collected.jcu.edu/mastersessays/54 This Essay is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Essays, and Senior Honors Projects at Carroll Collected. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Essays by an authorized administrator of Carroll Collected. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SHADOWS OF EMPIRE: THE DISPLACED NEW WORLD OF ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA An Essay Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies College of Arts & Sciences of John Carroll University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts By Christopher J. Kane 2016 Fortis imagination generat casum (“Powerful imagination generates the event”) -Montaigne, Essais Perhaps more than any of Shakespeare’s other works, Antony and Cleopatra defies singular readings. Within its massive sprawl, the play constitutes a tragedy, the third and most complex of the Bard’s “Roman” plays, a gender-bending comedy, and an infinite number of studies on the subtopics lurking within its boundless lines. Some of these studies have paid a great deal of attention to the imperial and colonial subtext within this play, as the plot of the drama recounts the story of the Roman subjugation of the kingdom of Egypt, according to Plutarch.
    [Show full text]